Syria

[droid]

The statements aren't that same - Labour's only mentions Assad to imply equivalence between him and the alleged "jihadists". Every line of Labour's reeks. it's thoroughly disingenuous, the asking for a "full and independent investigation" is the worst kind of kicking the can down the road, and will ensure that Assad and his backers never face a single consequence for their actions.

But this is precisely what the foreign office and the US have asked for. I quoted their statements above. Its 'horrendous' when labour say it, but fine when everyone else says the same thing?

This is nonsense and gives credence to false flag conspiracy bullshit. You're better than that, mate. I would ask you to unpack but to be honest, I'm not that interested.

Given previous attacks it's unlikely I agree, but the possibility cant be entirely discounted. One would have to be monstrously credulous to place complete faith in Western govt and media.

 

[DannyL]

But this is precisely what the foreign office and the US have asked for. I quoted their statements above. Its 'horrendous' when labour say it, but fine when everyone else says the same thing?

It's the intention. Labour is about obscuring blame, due to an ideological soft spot for "the axis of resistance". See the video I posted upthread and pretty much the entirely of Labour foreign policy pronouncements on the subject (this article is a good resource). Boris Johnson is obviously a massive arsehole but at least he can call a mass murderer out for what he is.

 

[droid]

Ah, the intention, I see.

Certainly no intentions behind the US or UK statements, no geopolitical agendas or domestic concerns, no history there of appeasement or support of mass murderers.

 

[DannyL]

Yes exactly, the intention - obscuring the actions of mass murderers, and false equivalence with the victims, due to ideology. It's a shameful statement for a party that claims to be progressive.

 

[Mr. Tea]

It's the intention. Labour is about obscuring blame, due to an ideological soft spot for "the axis of resistance". See the video I posted upthread and pretty much the entirely of Labour foreign policy pronouncements on the subject (this article is a good resource). Boris Johnson is obviously a massive arsehole but at least he can call a mass murderer out for what he is.

Yeah, remember 18 months ago when an "aide" speaking for Corbyn (i.e. presumably either Milne or someone answering to him) said this:

Speaking after Prime Minister’s Questions, Mr Corbyn’s spokesman said: “The focus on Russian atrocities, or Syrian army atrocities, which is absolutely correct, I think sometimes diverts attention from other atrocities that have taken place.”

He added: “Independent assessments are that there have been very large scale civilian casualties as a result of US-led coalition bombing and there are several cases of large numbers of civilian deaths in single attacks and there hasn’t been so much attention on those atrocities or those casualties.

“Both the United States and Britain, the British Government, have been reluctant to accept any independent assessment of those.”

Last night Mr Johnson sparked an angry response from Russia after suggesting people should protest outside the country’s London embassy due to its actions in Syria.

But asked whether people should also rally outside the US embassy, Mr Corbyn’s spokesman said: “People are free to protest outside the intervening powers’ embassies and there are a number of them, not just the United States and Russia. There are multiple foreign interventions in the Syrian civil war.”

?

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

This could be done for instance causing minimal casualties with the imposition of a no fly zone with hitting military bases and installations if breached

could it? I have no idea, but I do know that limited military intervention in general has a poor track record both at being effective + at staying limited.

also have some further questions for Danny/anyone. please forgive any ignorance, I have the general picture but haven't followed Syria nearly as closely as I did Iraq.

at this point, minus a large direct Western intervention that almost certainly (Bolton notwithstanding) isn't forthcoming, Assad wins + stays in power, correct?

given that, what is your ideal but realistic endgame + post-war scenario? some kind of devolved thing a la Iraq where the Kurds + possibly others have semi-autonomy (idk if that's actually realistic or not)? power-sharing? if so, between who? do you think there's any way to extricate Syrian internal politics from the numerous proxy conflicts? is there any likely future besides Assad staying in power as a brutal Russian-backed client dictator?

 

[droid]

From my reading of it I think the general consensus now (even amongst his most vociferous critics) is that Assad has won, and the only way to minimise the bloodshed in the short term is to allow him to consolidate his victory.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

possibly stating obvious but it reminds me quite a bit of the endless Congo wars, but much higher geopolitical flash point b/c Middle East

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

From my reading of it I think the general consensus now (even amongst his most vociferous critics) is that Assad has won, and the only way to minimise the bloodshed in the short term is to allow him to consolidate his victory.

yes that is my impression also

I'm wondering what a post-finishing victory + consolidation Syria will look like? will there be some kind of agreement w/the Kurds? does he just crush everyone?

 

[droid]

I think Kurd crushing has been outsourced to the Turks and Iraqis.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

whence Iran, Russia (+ China), Gulf states, etc as well as U.S., interests in post-war Syria?

can Alawite minority continue to dominate into foreseeable future?

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

I think Kurd crushing has been outsourced to the Turks and Iraqis.

right-o. you're just referring to Kurds in Syria here, correct?

 

[firefinga]

Is there any likely future besides Assad staying in power as a brutal Russian-backed client dictator?

No.

 

[droid]

right-o. you're just referring to Kurds in Syria here, correct?

It seems to have already started. Iraq attacks Mosul and clears Kurdish forces from the Syrian border, Turkey attacks Afrin and then the next phase could be combined Syrian/Turkish (& perhaps Russian and ISIS) attack on Syrian Kurdistan driving them East towards iraq.

 

[Mr. Tea]

A fine thanks for driving ISIS out of northern Iraq!

Edit: not implying the Kurdish militias are above criticism, of course - but they do seem to catch a disproportionate amount of shit from all sides.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

driving them East towards iraq

w/ultimate goal of what, ethnically cleansing Kurds from Syria/forcing them all to Iraqi Kurdistan? or just crushing Syrian Kurds in general?

tbc you're not suggesting any kind of further Iraqi Arab (w/whoever else) move against Iraqi Kurdistan, right?

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

they do seem to catch a disproportionate amount of shit from all sides

well ya Kurdish history in a nutshell

 

[droid]

w/ultimate goal of what, ethnically cleansing Kurds from Syria/forcing them all to Iraqi Kurdistan? or just crushing Syrian Kurds in general?

tbc you're not suggesting any kind of further Iraqi Arab (w/whoever else) move against Iraqi Kurdistan, right?

I think the ultimate aim may be to wipe out or neutralise the Syrian kurds and push the Iraqi Kurds North and west of Ebril and Halabja, with Turkey applying pressure on its southern Iraqi border.

 

[DannyL]

I think - possibly - you guys might be underestimating how weak Assad's state is. It was weeks away from collapsing when Russia intervened, parts of the county seem to be under control of local warlords, and without the Iranian ground troops and Russian support it'd fall to pieces quite quickly. I think in a sense he needs the war to keep going and to keep in place. He won't be able to win any kind of peace - not without mass murder. I read some stuff last week about the granting of passports to huge numbers of Iranians which I guess is an attempt to engineer massive demographic change.

As to what post-war Syria might look like, one thing that I always have found interesting and inspiring about the uprising was the commitment to democracy and the ballot box -in a sense, there's a deeper commitment and belief to these ideas than there is in the West. There's some material about that in the article I reposted above. Ghouta and the other rebel areas have managed to function even under conditions of siege and bombardment so the seeds of a nascent democracy are there, though it might seem hopelessly idealistic to put any faith in this at this stage.

 

[DannyL]

Here's a link to the passport story: https://en.zamanalwsl.net/news/article/34077/